Head-to-Head Analysis

Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught vs Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate

Wondering which one to pick? We analyzed the nutritional profile, ingredients, and vegan status to help you decide.

Top Pick
Package of Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught

Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught

Not Vegan
VS
Package of Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate

Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
161 kcal
Energy
533 kcal
0g
Sugars
50g
8.9g
Fat
33.3g
21.4g
Protein
6.7g
0.1g
Salt
0.3g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught and Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate side-by-side, the nutritional differences become quite clear. Both products cater to specific dietary needs, but picking the right one depends on whether you are prioritizing weight loss, muscle gain, or clean eating.

For calorie-conscious consumers, Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught is the clear winner. With 372 fewer calories per 100g than its competitor, it allows for more volume while keeping your energy intake in check.

In terms of sugar control, Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught takes the lead with only 0g of sugar per 100g, whereas Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate contains 50g. Lower sugar content is often linked to better metabolic health.

Looking to build muscle? Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught offers a protein boost with 21.4g per 100g, outperforming Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught or Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate?

Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught appears to be the healthier option generally, as it has less sugar and fewer calories.

Is Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught vegan?

No, Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Sockeye Salmon Skin On Fillet Wild Caught and Toffee & Almonds In Milk Chocolate?

There is a difference of 372 calories per 100g between the two products.

Data source: Open Food Facts. Comparisons are generated automatically based on nutritional values per 100g.